O
Douglas County
← Community
ZoningCommunity discussion

Transfer Development Rights (TDR) Program Study and Reform

Douglas County

Summary not yet generated for this topic.

Community sentiment

Supportive (2)Opposed (1)Concerned (2)Neutral (1)

At a glance

Public comments
6
Last 30 days
0

Last discussed Jan 13, 2026.

Public comments (6)

ConcernedEllie WallerJan 13, 2026

Urged commissioners to attend regional planning meetings, monitor TRPA housing initiatives, and ensure robust transparency and database accuracy.

Planning Commission - Jan 13, 2026 · 2:00 →
OpposedJim SladeJan 13, 2026

Criticized reliance on consultants and secret stakeholder meetings, arguing that growth policies favor development over residents and urging caution against stormwater taxes and floodplain building.

Planning Commission - Jan 13, 2026 · 4:48 →
SupportiveJock EtchigoyenJan 13, 2026

Shared decades of open space preservation experience and proposed a 'one rooftop, one TDR' requirement to ensure every new water hookup in the valley supports conservation.

Planning Commission - Jan 13, 2026 · 1:46:17 →
SupportiveDavid HusmanJan 13, 2026

Expressed support for the TDR program, emphasizing that demand must be driven by prioritizing receiving areas and avoiding unearned zone changes.

Planning Commission - Jan 13, 2026 · 1:52:13 →
ConcernedMark NetterupJan 13, 2026

Noted the massive surplus of existing TDRs compared to annual building permits and stated that shrinking the total number of credits is necessary for the program to function.

Planning Commission - Jan 13, 2026 · 1:55:48 →
NeutralDan AinsworthJan 13, 2026

Discussed the growth management ordinance, predicting that allocation caps will soon restrict project approvals and force developers and commissioners to address housing and TDR realities.

Planning Commission - Jan 13, 2026 · 2:00:12 →